johndoesecond
Posts: 910
Joined: 8/3/2010 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: phoenix £70 is cheap for it. Can't recall what I paid - whatever the release price was. The market is full of absolute unadulterated ****. It disappoints me terribly to see it happening - the dumbing down of all the initial promise that computer gaming offered. It's relentless. This game is more like art than entertainment. Like Skyhigh said, it is enriching. It makes you go to reality and delve deeper. It requires imagination to picture what is happening because all you've got are silly counters on the surface. Like Lieste said, it's fantastically scaleable. You can play it with minimal effort and detail or you can really go slow and click all the buttons and - and here is the thing - be provided with a mountain of info for your imagination to work on. It's all about providing a sense of reality that engages your imagination. It's a stand-out game and is outstanding in terms of the development of the AI that is crucial to achieving that. I've bought every iteration and will buy everything else Panther produces. I'm still playing BFTB now - how many years after release? - still learning, still not bored, and still playing against the AI!! I paid over £100 for that stupid bundle of rubbish that is EagleDynamics A10, glossy and beautiful but with no AI at all, as far as I can see. Not a game, not an enriching experience, not something that encourages any kind of engagement with history etc. Paid all that and bored to death within about ten hours. My fault, because of my flight dreams, perhaps, but the point is, BFTB is really exceptional in the treatment of AI. No one else is doing it the same. Closest thing might be something like CMSF or Normandy - but the silly little sprites depress me after a while. They are very far from realistic (along with the hexed terrain) - and there's no AI, again. You have to command everything. There's no nuance to it. I'd pay more for what Panther does, happily. I agree, thoroughly. About that comparison with CMSF, Normandy (and other previous iterations of the CM engine, and other similar games), I have to say I used to like those games and played them a lot, once upon a time. But then, I've got enlightened (and thunder-lightened) by BftB for it's subtle and substantial realism. And if I may, I'd use this word in a philosophical sense, if I'm allowed. What I mean is that the subject of agency (who you are) is fixed, focused and just done right. And when you "get it", it's indistinguishable from magic. Look, even if there's a 3D representation of the battlefield in those CM engines, that's really not the way the on-the-field commanding works in the real world. There's this what I would call "Peter-Pan syndrome", which might be fun, engaging and attractive, but if you think about it a bit, it is fundamentally misleading. I mean, no commander could levitate over the battlefield, roaming freely in the air. So, at that scale, the commanding experience would be radically different than the one you get in CM, ToW and other similar games. At the scale of battle the BftB simulates, BftB got it right, and it feels so right. Maybe, just maybe, there's no other wargame that is so consistent with that fixing the subject of agency, allowing you the player to have realistic powers (and the lack thereof), knowledge (and ignorance), information (and uncertainties), constraints, what you can and cannot do and have, of that subject which you are in BftB. BftB is like Rome, you should play it before you die. (As for the price, it's one of those rare games I'd agree "There are some things money can't buy. For everything else, there's ..." Even if I hadn't time to play it, it'd really be like panda for me: I'd be willing to pay to protect it against extinction and to let it to live and prosper, even if I never saw and will see one.)
< Message edited by johndoesecond -- 7/27/2011 9:38:16 PM >
|